Suppr超能文献

促宫颈成熟的合成渗透压宫颈扩张器与地诺前列酮阴道栓剂用于引产的随机试验。

A randomized trial of synthetic osmotic cervical dilator for induction of labor vs dinoprostone vaginal insert.

机构信息

Institute of Metabolism and Systems Biology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom (Dr Gupta).

Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom (Ms Maher and Messrs Stubbs and Brocklehurst).

出版信息

Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022 Jul;4(4):100628. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100628. Epub 2022 Mar 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Induction of labor is a commonly performed obstetrical intervention. Vaginal prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) is a first-choice agent. Mechanical methods of induction are slower in achieving cervical ripening but have a lower risk of adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy, maternal and neonatal safety, and maternal satisfaction of a synthetic osmotic cervical dilator (Dilapan-S) with those of dinoprostone.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an open-label superiority randomized controlled trial in 4 English hospitals. Eligible participants were women ≥16 years of age undergoing induction of labor for a singleton pregnancy at ≥37 weeks' gestation with vertex presentation and intact membranes. The women were randomly assigned to receive either Dilapan-S or dinoprostone using a telephone randomization system minimized by hospital, parity, body mass index, and maternal age. The induction agent was replaced as required until the cervix was assessed as favorable for labor by the Bishop score. The primary outcome was failure to achieve vaginal delivery (ieor a cesarean delivery being performed). The secondary outcome measures included maternal and neonatal adverse events. Analysis was by intention-to-treat, adjusting for design variables where possible.

RESULTS

Between December 19, 2017 and January 26, 2021, 674 women were randomized (337 to Dilapan-S, and 337 to dinoprostone). The trial did not reach its planned sample size of 860 participants because of restrictions on research during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was missing for 2 women in the dinoprostone group. Failure to achieve vaginal delivery (or a cesarean delivery being performed) occurred in 126 women (37.4%) allocated to Dilapan-S and in 115 (34.3%) women allocated to dinoprostone (adjusted risk difference, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, -0.05 to 0.10). There were similar maternal and neonatal adverse events between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Women undergoing induction of labor with Dilapan-S have similar rates of cesarean delivery and maternal and neonatal adverse events compared with dinoprostone.

摘要

背景

引产是一种常见的产科干预措施。阴道前列腺素 E2(地诺前列酮)是首选药物。机械诱导方法使宫颈成熟的速度较慢,但不良反应的风险较低。

目的

本研究旨在比较合成渗透宫颈扩张器(Dilapan-S)与地诺前列酮在疗效、母婴安全性和产妇满意度方面的差异。

研究设计

这是一项在 4 家英国医院进行的开放性、优效性随机对照试验。纳入标准为年龄≥16 岁、单胎妊娠、孕龄≥37 周、头位、胎膜完整、行引产的孕妇。通过电话随机系统,根据医院、产次、体重指数和产妇年龄最小化,将孕妇随机分配至 Dilapan-S 组或地诺前列酮组。根据 Bishop 评分,当宫颈成熟有利于分娩时,按需更换诱导药物。主要结局为未能实现阴道分娩(即行剖宫产)。次要结局指标包括母婴不良事件。采用意向治疗分析,尽可能调整设计变量。

结果

2017 年 12 月 19 日至 2021 年 1 月 26 日期间,共纳入 674 名孕妇(Dilapan-S 组 337 名,地诺前列酮组 337 名)。由于 COVID-19 大流行期间对研究的限制,该试验未达到计划的 860 名参与者的样本量。地诺前列酮组有 2 名孕妇的主要结局缺失。Dilapan-S 组 126 名(37.4%)和地诺前列酮组 115 名(34.3%)孕妇未能实现阴道分娩(或行剖宫产)(调整风险差异,0.02;95%置信区间,-0.05 至 0.10)。两组的母婴不良事件发生率相似。

结论

与地诺前列酮相比,Dilapan-S 用于引产的孕妇剖宫产率、母婴不良事件发生率相似。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验